Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 14th, 2009

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Thank you.

I would like to thank the Speaker and the Clerk of the House.

Since I'm taking part in this exercise for the very first time, could you please explain to me the item “temporary funding for the former Prime Minister“.

Does a transition measure kick in each time a prime minister leaves office?

The Speaker also mentioned the security threats associated with information technologies. What steps need to be taken to address these threats? Basically, where are we going with new technologies in terms of security? What exactly do you have in mind?

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

The normal practice has been that if a Prime Minister resigns and remains a member of Parliament, he or she receives an additional allowance to pay for travel, additional staff, or whatever, compared with other members. That was arranged for Mr. Martin when he left the prime ministership, and he received it as long as he was a member of Parliament. He didn't run in the last election, so the payment is now gone. That's why the estimates were reduced by the amount I indicated. I think it was $149,000.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Since a former prime minister may be called upon to be a guest speaker at conferences and to travel, is there not a special budget set aside for that purpose for a certain period of time?

I know that for a certain period of time in Quebec, Mr. Parizeau and Mr. Landry received some financial assistance from the Quebec government to help them discharge their duties as former premiers.

Does the federal government provide a similar form of assistance?

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

No. A budget is available to them for the period of time they remain as members of Parliament. When they leave, the payment stops. That's the way it's always been, as far as I know.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

I see.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

As for your other question, the Clerk is far wiser than I am when it comes to giving you an answer.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

We have our very own Colombo.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Audrey O'Brien]

Certainly, in the rumpled sweepstakes, I would agree with you.

I'd like to invite Louis Bard,Chief Information Officer, to come to the table to give you a more detailed answer to your question.

We continue to check everything that goes on the network to ensure that there are no viruses. This is something we do regularly.

Recently, we have also forged a sound partnership with the government's two security groups, with CSEC. This agency continually scans the environment in order to detect potential attacks. For example, the newspapers recently reported on what had been found several months ago, further to one of these exercises.

Perhaps Louis could continue, since my French vocabulary is somewhat lacking.

[Louis Bard, Chief Information Officer, House of Commons]

Thank you, Madam Clerk, Mr. Chair.

I would be happy to answer your question, sir.

The concept of the parliamentary precinct, which encompasses the thirty or so buildings downtown that house the offices of Parliament, as well as all constituency offices, was developed to ensure the ongoing integrity and security of each individual MP, as well as respect for the caucuses and respect for communications. Certainly, the intention was to create an environment in which information is protected and in which members can discharge their duties. In that regard, I think we have done a good job.

Ms. O'Brien alluded to the Communications Security Establishment Canada. This agency handles cyber attacks, viruses and threats to Canada. Until now, we have worked closely with CSEC and we have received excellent feedback on our work. CSEC officials have been very impressed by everything we have managed to do to in terms of protecting members and by the fact that there has never been a major security incident involving the parliamentary precinct, unlike what we have seen in some areas of the private sector or in other government departments. We are quite well protected.

However, the number of breaches continues to increase. For instance, in 2007, we saw a 468% increase in the kinds of viruses and attacks on the various organizations. That's an increase of over 1.1 million in the space of one year. The parliamentary precinct is certainly a preferred target. During the course of investigations, we often receive calls informing us that we are a preferred target because of our trademark.

We also have a number of projects on the go that increase the mobility of members. We want greater access to your constituency offices. We are developing more strategies to synchronize all of your communications. We want to work more closely with the RCMP, with Senate partners and with other parties outside Parliament. We want the parliamentary precinct to be opened up. Clearly, we need to be even more disciplined.

So then, it's not a matter of our having major problems, but rather a matter of our wanting to make the system better and more efficient. Our objective is to ensure that members work in a fully secure environment at all times. That is the main target of our strategies.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Great.

Next on our list is Mr. Comartin.

Welcome to our committee today.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you. I am covering for my whip. I've been told by him not to ask any questions, but I'm going to ask one anyway.

I expect, Mr. Chair, that you'll protect my parliamentary privilege.

I'll declare a bit of a personal conflict. Perhaps Mr. Bard can help with this, as well. On a number of occasions, other members in my caucus have asked to place a webcam on their computers, both in their constituencies and here, in order to be able to communicate, in some cases with family, especially with young children, and in other cases with their constituents so they actually can see their constituents when they're talking to them. That technology is evolving very rapidly in the sense that it's being used more extensively.

The response was that we couldn't do that, even when we offered to pay for the webcams ourselves. It appeared that there was a security issue around it. I'm having some difficulty with the security argument, because this technology is being widely used in the commercial sector.

I'm wondering what the situation is with that, and if there are any plans to allow members to purchase the webcams, put them on, and make them accessible.

The other point that I would make—having done this in my own residence—is that it's much less expensive. We're not charged for long distance, as we are if it's a regular telephone call and we're going outside of the local area.

For those two reasons, both in terms of our ability to communicate better with our constituents and from a cost vantage point, I'm wondering where we're at with that.

[Audrey O'Brien]

I know that the use of webcams is becoming much more common, and I confess to you that I'm really not in a position to explain some of the security issues, because I don't understand them myself.

Louis could, perhaps, enlighten us both.

[Louis Bard]

Regarding webcams, over the years, a number of pilot projects involving different members have been initiated. Some members do use webcams in exceptional circumstances, either to speak to their children who may be ill or in situations where solutions have been put in place. Certainly webcams can be very educational and this tool does work very well.

At one time, a member wanted to use a webcam for his constituency office. At the same time, he also wanted to benefit from the broadcast quality. The question that arises here is one of service in terms of the interpretation and in terms of the correct service model for a member. There is no question that security remains an issue. Capacity and volume must also be considered, since information is being transferred. The network capacity is enormous.

We have also introduced a number of new services that involve the network and transmission capabilities.

Therefore, if a genuine need arises, or if the need for this service becomes more pressing, I would be willing to review the situation and to come back to the committee with some recommendations.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Is security an issue?

[Louis Bard]

There is a difference between being at your office and travelling. That always depends on how it is used and the means of transmission.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Here, on the Hill, is security an issue?

[Louis Bard]

In some cases, we have been able to put in place what we call private networks, which do not cause security problems. IT strategies in general will enable us—we were aiming for the fall—to facilitate the mobility of all members and create private networks connected to the parliamentary precinct. That will foster the introduction of all sorts of innovations and possibilities in terms of infrastructure.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I would like it to be looked into, if it can be. It's a major issue for MPs with young families.

[Audrey O'Brien]

If I may, Mr. Comartin, one of the things that sometimes happens when individual requests come up like this that are eminently reasonable is that we look at them in light of perhaps the emergence of a new type of service to members. It's a question of figuring out how we're going to provide that to everybody. That becomes part of the things we're looking for in the next step in terms of an evolution.

I understand there may be some frustration with people who want to get on with that immediately. In light of that, I think we can certainly make some progress on this. Usually we move on to a pilot project that we set up to see how it will work where you have about 25 or 30 members--those members who are interested in doing this. I think we could make some quick progress on this.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Mr. Chair, I forgot to declare my conflict. I became a grandparent for the first time this year, twice. In fact, I'm going to be a grandparent again for the third time. My daughter just announced it a few weeks ago. I got to see my grandson walk for the first time about a month ago--this was from home, obviously--and I wouldn't have been able to do that from Parliament Hill.

[Audrey O'Brien]

That seems like a worthy goal, then.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Madam Jennings.

[Marlene Jennings, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

I thank you both very much for your presentation and the answers that you've given to some important questions.

I have two questions.The first is just a clarification on page 8, the first paragraph, which comes under the heading of “Salaries”, about halfway down. It's speaking about the Expenditure Restraint Act.

The sentence begins as follows:

However, it is important to note that the Act will not be applied retroactively and any agreements that were reached prior to the Royal Assent of the Act will be respected. Salary adjustments after Royal Assent will respect the Act and will be included in future funding requests.

Am I right in believing this means if there are collective agreements in existence at this time that are multiple years, and those multiple years go beyond the date of implementation of the Expenditure Restraint Act, then those collective agreements, if the wage increases have been agreed to, negotiated, signed, and are now part of a legal document, will not be affected by the Expenditure Restraint Act?